Allahabad Court September 2010 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Prasoon Gupta and ors Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-28-2010
1. This application under section 482 Cr.P.C.has been moved by the applicants Prasoon Gupta, Pramod Gupta and Smt.Vimla Gupta with a prayer to quash the order dated 26.7.2010 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 1 Jhansi in S.T.No. 96 of 2009 whereby the charge under section 306 I.P.C. and alternative charge under section 302/34 I.P.C.has been framed. 2. The facts, in brief, of this case are that the FIR of this case has been lodged by Santosh Kumar Gupta against the applicants on 3.1.2009 at 2.00 P.M.in respect of the incident which had occurred on 2.1.2009 at about 10.00 A.M. at the police station Chir Gaon in Case Crime No. 1 of 2009 under sections 328 & 304 I.P.C. alleging therein that the marriage of the deceased Smt. Archana Gupta, the sister of the first informant, was solemnized with the applicant Prasoon Gupta about 20 years prior to the alleged incident. The deceased was living in her in-laws house, she was issue less, she was always subjected to the cru...
Shekhar Bahuguna Vs. Suresh Chandra Kapoor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-28-2010
1. This is tenant's revision under section 25 of Provincial Small Cause Courts Act. Original Suit No.6 of 1992 was instituted by the plaintiff landlord opposite party herein for recovery of arrears of rent, damages and ejectment of the defendant tenant applicant in respect of house no.16, Nyay Marg (12-B Hastings Road), Allahabad which has been decreed on 23rd of September, 2009 by the order under revision. 2. Though it was a simple suit of small cause nature for recovery of arrears of rent and ejectment by landlord against the tenant, but it took about 17 years in its disposal. 3. The plaintiff landlord (hereinafter referred as the landlord) presently residing at Delhi. He retired as Chairman-cum-Managing Director, National Building Corporation (a government of India undertaking) in the year 1987. 4. The original tenant was Hemwati Nandan Bahuguna, the Ex-Chief Minister of U.P. and after his death his son Shekhar Bahuguna and Smt. Kamla Bahuguna inherited tenancy. 5. The suit was inst...
Mahabir Prasad Gautam and anr. Vs. State of U.P.and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-27-2010
Arijit Pasayat, J.1. Leave granted.2. Appellants call in question legality of the judgment rendered by a learned Single Judge of the Patna High Court holding that the issuance of summons to the appellants by learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Patna in complaint case No. 1613 (C) of 2002 filed by the respondent No. 1 is proper.3. Factual background in nutshell is as follows:Respondent No. 1 (hereinafter referred to as the 'complainant') filed a complaint on 9.8.2002 alleging that the appellants had committed offences punishable under Sections 406 and 409 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short the 'IPC'). The date of occurrence was indicated to be between 12.7.1995 to 8.5.2002. The basic allegations in the complaint were that an advertisement was issued by the appellant No. 1 seeking applications for appointment to the post of Area Manager. The complainant, who was then working in another concern applied for the post, was called to the interview on 14.7.1995 and was asked to repor...
Smt Kavit. Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (U.P.) and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-27-2010
1. The present application has been filed for quashing the order dated 19.8.2010 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate II, Bijnor in misc. case no. 1349 of 2010 under Section 156(3), Cr.P.C. whereby, after calling for police report, the Magistrate directed that the application of the applicant be treated as complaint case. 2. It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that till date statement under Section 202, Cr.P.C. has not been recorded. It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that when no first information report was lodged by the police with regard to commission of cognizable offence, the applicant filed application under Section 156(3), Cr.P.C. before the court, who, after calling the police report, treated the same as complaint case. It is further contended that order impugned has given long rope to the police to refuse to register of first information report of cognizable offence and further the Magistrate was approached by the applicant...
Deepak Singh. Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-27-2010
1. Heard Shri Santosh Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State. This is an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. filed by the applicant with a prayer to set aside the order dated 19.11.2009 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Auraiya, in Session Trial No. 151 of 2009 by which the application moved by the applicant for release of his revolver which is case property in case crime No. 169 of 2009 has been rejected as well as the order dated 3.6.2010 passed by the Sessions Judge, Auraiya, rejecting the revision preferred by the applicant.2. The facts of the case which are not in dispute are that the applicant is the owner of revolver No.14545/08 S.G.N.5766T 6360. On the basis of First Information Report lodged by Sushil Kumar at P.S. Kotwali, case crime No. 169 of 2009 was registered against the applicant under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307 IPC in which it was alleged that the applicant misused the aforementioned revolver causing injury as such the same was sei...
Sarfaraz Ul Huq and ors. Vs. State of U.P. and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-27-2010
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A. G. A. and perused the record. This application under Section 482 Cr. P. C. has been filed by applicants with a prayer for quashing the entire proceedings of Case No. 6536 of 2008 (State v. Sarfaraj Ul Haq & ors) under Sections 506 IPC registered against the applicants pursuant to the submission of the charge-sheet dated25.7.2008. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the opposite party no. 2 lodged First Information Report on 6.6.2008 at P.S. Churki, District Aligarh on the basis of which Case Crime No.289 of 2009 under Sections-420, 467, 468, 471, 447, 448, 506 & 511 I. P. C. was registered against the applicants.2. The Investigating Officer after conducting the investigation submitted a charge sheet under Section 506 iPC against the applicants. Upon submission of the aforesaid charge sheet cognizance of the offence was taken by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Aligarh on 12.9.2008 and Case Crime No. 6536 of 2008 (State...
Gurumeet Singh (Kakaji). Vs. State of U.P.and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-27-2010
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State respondent. The present 482 Petition has been filed for quashing of the charge sheet dated 09.07.2008 in case crime no. 386 of 2007 under section 409 IPC and also for quashing of the proceedings of case no. 956/IX/08 under section 409 IPC pending before the Judicial Magistrate, Chhata, District Mathura and also for quashing of the summoning order dated 21.07.2008. 2. In para 11 of the accompanying affidavit, it has been stated that the applicant was not aware of the order dated 21.07.2008 till the last week of May, 2010 and came to know when the police came to his office in his absence and informed his office about the issuance of non-bailable warrants issued against him. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that it is a contractual matter. 3. The opposite party no. 2, who was the sub-contractor has himself breached the contract and therefore, the civil matter has been dragged into criminal prosecu...
isha Ansari and ors. Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (U.P.) and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-27-2010
1. Supplementary affidavit has been filed on behalf of the applicants, which is taken on record. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned AGA for the State-respondent. The present 482 Petition has been filed for quashing of the proceedings of complaint case no. 2037 of 2009 under sections 147, 323, 452, 504, 506 IPC pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kasya, Kushinagar. 2. Learned counsel for the applicants states that the criminal prosecution of the applicants is nothing but a counter blast to the proceedings initiated by the applicants' side against opposite party no. 2. Therefore, the same is bad in law. It is further contended by the learned counsel for the applicants that no offence against the applicants is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purposes of harassment. He pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention. 3. From the perusal of the material on record and looking int...
Pramod Kumar Sharma Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-27-2010
1. This is an appeal against the judgment of a learned Single Judge dismissing a writ petition filed by the appellant. 2. The petitioner is a Sub Inspector of Police who has questioned the correctness of the order dated 3rd February, 2010 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate in compliance whereof the Office of the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Meerut has proceeded to command the concerned authority to deduct salary of two months that has been imposed as a pecuniary punishment by the learned Magistrate, in the purported exercise of powers of Section 29 of the U.P. Police Act, 1861. 3. The punishment has been imposed on an allegation that the petitioner has wilfully committed breach of duty by not complying with the order of the Magistrate in a criminal case which involved the abduction and custody of a minor girl. 4. An F.I.R. was lodged under Section 363/364 I.P.C. being case crime No. 311 of 2009. The alleged minor Km. Rukhsar along with the accused Saleem filed Writ ...
Prem Nath Mehrotra Vs. State of U.P.and ors
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-27-2010
1. The State of U.P. was having eight Zamindari Abolition Compensation Bonds of the face value Rs.5,000/-. The State of U.P. directed the Collector, Farrukhabad to sell the aforesaid bonds by public auction at the market value. On the direction of the Collector, Naib Tehsildar issued sale proclamation for public auction and the bonds were put to auction on 12.8.1969. The plaintiff participated in the auction and offered highest bid of Rs.3,020/-. His bid was accepted and he deposited 1/4th of the bid amount. The Naib Tehsildar submitted report to the Sub-Divisional Officer concerned and the plaintiff's bid was approved by the Sub-Divisional Officer. He was directed to deposit the balance amount which he duly deposited. However, when the bonds were forwarded to the Collector for endorsement of the name of the plaintiff as the purchaser, the Collector refused to make the endorsement and directed for a fresh auction as he was of the opinion that the auction was not proper. The bonds were ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »